Comment Close
Date
Statement
Name 

Status

Assignee(s)

Call for
Comments Open
Call for
Comments
Close 
Vote OpenVote CloseDate of SubmissionStaff Contact and EmailStatement Number
13.03.2015Potential Change to Registrar Accreditation Insurance Requirement

ADOPTED

15Y, 0N, 0A

Tijani Ben Jemaa

27.02.201506.03.2015 23:59 UTC08.03.2015 23:59 UTC13.03.2015 12:00 UTC13.03.2015
Danielle Andela
AL-ALAC-ST-0315-01-00-EN


For information about this PC, please click here 

 

FINAL VERSION TO BE SUBMITTED IF RATIFIED

Please click here to download a copy of the pdf document below.

 


FINAL DRAFT VERSION TO BE VOTED UPON BY THE ALAC

The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) would like to reiterate its Full support to the concept of supporting the domain name industry (DNI) in underserved regions, as was originally expressed in 2014.

The ALAC also mentioned that as the DNI programs evolve, the following principles should be adhered to:

  • Registrant and user rights and expectations must not be lowered in order to increase DNI penetration
  • Education at all levels is a key to increasing demand and local suppliers
  • The demands placed on registrars should be reasonable based on local cost-of-living and related financial constraints
  • The insurance required for registrars is a real concern for underserved regions (e.g. cost, convertibility of the local currency)
  • The second round of the new gTLD program should give preference, if not exclusivity, to applicants from underserved regions, with the adequate outreach program that ensure a better understanding of the program, its benefits (e.g. economic, cultural, linguistic, etc.) and all the requirements for an application, as well as a technical and legal Support.

In response to the 5 questions of the current Public Comment:

  1. Even if things have evolved, there is still a requirement to secure registrants rights through the CGL insurance or any other mechanism(s);
  2. No opinion;
  3. A permanent fund reserved by ICANN for the coverage of any harm that the registrants might incur may be a reasonable option and having volume-based contributions from the registrars is also reasonable. However if ICANN chooses to make this a "best practice", registrants using registrar who choose not to follow the practice must NOT be disadvantaged;
  4. In case the CGL requirement is maintained, the $500,000 limit should be lowered  to an amount that the registrar can demonstrate that it would still provide for reasonable compensation in the event of a covered loss;
  5. If ICANN decides on the elimination of the CGL requirement, it should be applied to the whole registrars. The insurance should be replaced by another mechanism to protect the registrants and users rights

The ALAC emphasizes that the CGL requirement is not the only barrier for the underserved regions, but it is one of the most important.

Its elimination could be the best way to support the underserved regions to participate in the domain name industry. Registrant rights must be secured by another mechanism such as a fund fed by the registrars according to their transaction volume and reserved by ICANN. The underserved regions’ registrars could be exempted from paying their part in the so-called fund.

 


FIRST DRAFT SUBMITTED

The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) would like to reiterate its Full support to the concept of supporting the domain name industry (DNI) in underserved regions, which was expressed in 2014.

The ALAC also mentioned that as the DNI programs evolve, the following principles should be adhered to:

  • Registrant and user rights and expectations must not be lowered in order to increase DNI penetration
  • Education at all levels is a key to increasing demand and local suppliers
  • The demands placed on registrars should be reasonable based on local cost-of-living and related financial constraints
  • The insurance required for registrars is a real concern for the underserved regions (e.g. cost, convertibility of the local currency)
  • The second round of the new gTLD program should give preference, if not exclusivity, to applicants from underserved regions, with the adequate outreach program that ensure a better understanding of the program, its benefits (e.g. economic, cultural, linguistic, etc.) and all the requirements for an application, as well as a technical and Legal Support.

Answering the 5 questions of the current public comment, the ALAC thinks that:

  1. Even if things have evolved, there is still need to secure the registrants rights through the CGL insurance or any other mechanism.
  2. (answer pending)
  3. A permanent fund reserved by ICANN for the coverage of any harm that the registrants might incur. This fund might be fed by the registrars on the basis of their transactions volume
  4. In case the CGL requirement is maintained, the $500,000 limit should be lowered  to an amount that the registrar can demonstrate that it would still provide for reasonable compensation in the event of a covered loss
  5. If ICANN decides on the elimination of the CGL requirement, it should be applied to the whole registrars. The insurance should be replaced by another mechanism to protect the registrants and users rights

The ALAC emphasizes that the CGL requirement is not the only barrier for the underserved regions, but it is one of the most important.

Its elimination could be the best way to support the underserved regions to participate in the domain name industry. The registrant rights should be secured by another mechanism such as a fund fed by the registrars according to their transaction volume and reserved by ICANN. The underserved regions’ registrars could be exempted from paying their part in the so-called fun.

  • No labels

1 Comment

  1. I have done some general cleanup (grammar, clarity, etc.) and also made the following possibly substantive changes:

    • Not substantive, but changed "Full" to "full" in the first sentence. Underlining or using all caps would be equally acceptable.
    • Q 2 asks for input from registrars and registries. I am assuming we have no input here. If I am wrong, please replace my replacement
    • On Q 3, the question suggests that that contributions to the fund could be a "best practice". I added that if it is a best practice and a registrars option whether to contribute or not, that is an ICANN decision, but if a registrar does not follow this practice, their registrants MUST not be negatively impacted as per Q 1.
    • On 27 Feb., removed a redundant phrase in answer to Q 3 and corrected grammar in same answer.

     


    The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) would like to reiterate its Full support to the concept of supporting the domain name industry (DNI) in underserved regions, as was originally expressed in 2014.

    The ALAC also mentioned that as the DNI programs evolve, the following principles should be adhered to:

    • Registrant and user rights and expectations must not be lowered in order to increase DNI penetration
    • Education at all levels is a key to increasing demand and local suppliers
    • The demands placed on registrars should be reasonable based on local cost-of-living and related financial constraints
    • The insurance required for registrars is a real concern for underserved regions (e.g. cost, convertibility of the local currency)
    • The second round of the new gTLD program should give preference, if not exclusivity, to applicants from underserved regions, with the adequate outreach program that ensure a better understanding of the program, its benefits (e.g. economic, cultural, linguistic, etc.) and all the requirements for an application, as well as a technical and legal Support.

    In response to the 5 questions of the current Public Comment:

    1. Even if things have evolved, there is still a requirement to secure registrants rights through the CGL insurance or any other mechanism(s);
    2. No opinion;
    3. A permanent fund reserved by ICANN for the coverage of any harm that the registrants might incur may be a reasonable option and having volume-based contributions is also reasonable. However if ICANN chooses to make this a "best practice", registrants using registrar who choose not to follow the practice must NOT be disadvantaged;
    4. In case the CGL requirement is maintained, the $500,000 limit should be lowered  to an amount that the registrar can demonstrate that it would still provide for reasonable compensation in the event of a covered loss;
    5. If ICANN decides on the elimination of the CGL requirement, it should be applied to the whole registrars. The insurance should be replaced by another mechanism to protect the registrants and users rights

    The ALAC emphasizes that the CGL requirement is not the only barrier for the underserved regions, but it is one of the most important.

    Its elimination could be the best way to support the underserved regions to participate in the domain name industry. Registrant rights must be secured by another mechanism such as a fund fed by the registrars according to their transaction volume and reserved by ICANN. The underserved regions’ registrars could be exempted from paying their part in the so-called fund.